If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(YouTube)   Okay, smartass space engineers. I want you to blast off your rocket, hover it at 325 meters, then reduce power and land it back gently on the landing pad. I'll be watching from my hexacopter   (youtube.com) divider line 28
    More: Cool, landing pad, vertical takeoff, Chrysler Building, vertical takeoff and landing, rockets, grasshoppers, launch pads, SpaceX  
•       •       •

12986 clicks; posted to Main » on 06 Jul 2013 at 8:43 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Funniest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2013-07-06 08:50:07 AM
8 votes:
Didn't the Russians just do that with a Proton 5  'cept it landed with the pointy end down..
2013-07-06 08:53:52 AM
6 votes:
piece of cake,
s23.postimg.org
2013-07-06 09:17:57 AM
4 votes:
upload.wikimedia.org

VITH DIS TECHNOLOGIE, VE VOULD HAF VON DER VAR!
2013-07-06 08:48:51 AM
4 votes:
Nice, but can it grab this pebble from my hand?
2013-07-06 10:41:37 AM
3 votes:
Well done, Grasshopper.
2013-07-06 09:03:12 AM
3 votes:

Brick-House: Yeah, but think how cool it would have looked if it had crashed and exploded.


We don't want to copy the Russians, we want our own unique space program
2013-07-06 09:18:43 PM
2 votes:
legion_of_doo

shiat hovering & landing isn't special.
Let's see one of your launch vehicles do it.

It's not like they've got an extensive history of space shots
3.bp.blogspot.com

Yeah they haven't been anywhere really.

that they can plan to return much of anything from space.
The cargo version of Dragon can return 7,300 lbs from space
The crew version of dragon can return seven people from space.

No vehicle currently flying can handle that much cargo or crew.

/ Go rip on someone else.  Like the Russians.
2013-07-06 02:06:14 PM
2 votes:

Quantum Apostrophe: TheDirtyNacho: Still cool though as a proof of concept. We're a long way from orbit to vertical landing though. SpaceX is doing it with the individual rocket stages first.

It's still absurd. Oh look, we have to cut on payload (the part that brings profit to supposedly "private" space, yes?) so we can have enough fuel to land on our ass like in 1950s sci-fi.


You want to talk about absurd, look at the Wright Brothers!  Their first plane had no payload!  Completely and totally useless aircraft for carrying cargo.
2013-07-06 11:21:52 AM
2 votes:

Quantum Apostrophe: Mentalpatient87: Quantum Apostrophe: TheDirtyNacho: Still cool though as a proof of concept. We're a long way from orbit to vertical landing though. SpaceX is doing it with the individual rocket stages first.

It's still absurd. Oh look, we have to cut on payload (the part that brings profit to supposedly "private" space, yes?) so we can have enough fuel to land on our ass like in 1950s sci-fi.

Thaaat's right, stamp your little feet. The mean old rocket is hurting you, isn't it?

That's right, keep mashing that keyboard. That'll get you on Mars...

I mean, that's Space-X's "goal", right? And I suppose you just breathlessly ran in circles flailing your arms and yelling MARS! with a fishbowl over your head for half an hour right?

[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x318]


Anne Francis in Forbidden Planet: CUTIE IN SPAAAACCEEE.

digilander.libero.it

/rocket goes up.
2013-07-06 09:01:44 AM
2 votes:
Yeah, but think how cool it would have looked if it had crashed and exploded.
2013-07-06 08:50:49 AM
2 votes:
They must be using MechJeb.
2013-07-06 08:47:36 AM
2 votes:
Looks a lot like many of my Kerbal Space Program attempts, minus the intentional landing back on the launch pad part :P

/pretty cool
//wonder if they 3D printed any of the parts for it
2013-07-06 11:59:28 PM
1 votes:

hardinparamedic: omeganuepsilon: hardinparamedic: It's just not a space thread without Quantum Apostrophe being a dick to everyone he can for no reason.

He believes he's the lone voice of reason, a wolf pack of one.

[i1.ytimg.com image 480x360]

Our shenanigans are cheeky and fun. His are cruel and tragic.


Hey guys, leave QA alone!  It's not easy living life as a man without a penis...
2013-07-06 10:15:27 PM
1 votes:
Obviously it means I need MOAR STRUTS

i301.photobucket.com
2013-07-06 10:14:10 PM
1 votes:
Piece of cake.

i301.photobucket.com

Crap.  I meant piece of crap.
2013-07-06 05:18:41 PM
1 votes:

Somaticasual: TheDirtyNacho: The reusable shuttle was a sound idea in theory (and still is), but in order to get the money to make it fly they needed the Air Force.

It does make you wonder what the CIA is doing with theirs. Do we have a more extensive space surveillance or space warfare program than any country is admitting? It really wouldn't surprise me if the next cold war is space dominance (and not the ICBM kind these days)


Well its better to be prepared, never know what's up there...
popcultureninja.com

/that movie had great potential, just needed less lame-ass earth-side fumbling and more space nazis and earth forces clashing
2013-07-06 01:22:42 PM
1 votes:
I can only see 107/188 comments in this thread.
2013-07-06 12:41:34 PM
1 votes:

hardinparamedic: It's just not a space thread without Quantum Apostrophe being a dick to everyone he can for no reason.


He believes he's the lone voice of reason, a wolf pack of one.
2013-07-06 12:04:53 PM
1 votes:
It's just not a space thread without Quantum Apostrophe being a dick to everyone he can for no reason.
2013-07-06 11:35:52 AM
1 votes:

Valiente: Quantum Apostrophe: Mentalpatient87: Quantum Apostrophe: TheDirtyNacho: Still cool though as a

Anne Francis in Forbidden Planet: CUTIE IN SPAAAACCEEE.

[digilander.libero.it image 696x862]


we're one small step closer!

images.popmatters.com
2013-07-06 11:30:05 AM
1 votes:
This is why we have not had an alien invasion ....

"Look! They pack their tubes with exploding chemicals and ridethat into space! Exploding chemicals. Riding a gout of flame! You sure you want to tangle with beings that crazy?"
"Hell no."

UFO disappears
2013-07-06 11:01:55 AM
1 votes:
Mildly impressed:

www.homerhickam.com
2013-07-06 10:56:19 AM
1 votes:

TheDirtyNacho: Quantum Apostrophe: TheDirtyNacho: Still cool though as a proof of concept. We're a long way from orbit to vertical landing though. SpaceX is doing it with the individual rocket stages first.

It's still absurd. Oh look, we have to cut on payload (the part that brings profit to supposedly "private" space, yes?) so we can have enough fuel to land on our ass like in 1950s sci-fi.

I don't understand.   The math is not so hard.  Right now, cost of payload = fuel + whole new launch vehicle + operations

If you don't destroy your launch vehicle every time then Cost of payload = fuel + amortized launch vehicle + operations.

Thus cost of payload goes down.  They are sacrificing little payload to accomplish this.  It's a cost/benefit analysis from there.


QA will argue 3 is 7 and atoms have no age and we (meaning he) will never get into space on every space related story.

His butthurt over not being in space is palpable. I feed on it. Yesssss... Express the butthurt...
2013-07-06 10:55:54 AM
1 votes:

TheDirtyNacho: Quantum Apostrophe: TheDirtyNacho: Still cool though as a proof of concept. We're a long way from orbit to vertical landing though. SpaceX is doing it with the individual rocket stages first.

It's still absurd. Oh look, we have to cut on payload (the part that brings profit to supposedly "private" space, yes?) so we can have enough fuel to land on our ass like in 1950s sci-fi.

I don't understand.   The math is not so hard.  Right now, cost of payload = fuel + whole new launch vehicle + operations

If you don't destroy your launch vehicle every time then Cost of payload = fuel + amortized launch vehicle + operations.

Thus cost of payload goes down.  They are sacrificing little payload to accomplish this.  It's a cost/benefit analysis from there.


No use logic in Fark thread! Logics make Farkers moar angrier!

Can't stop the changes RAAAAAAWWWWWRRRRRR!
2013-07-06 09:47:20 AM
1 votes:

Giltric: Didn't they do this in the 80s with a wedge shaped craft?




Congress.
2013-07-06 08:52:49 AM
1 votes:

dangelder: Why didn't they just do what they needed to do with the hexacopter in the first place?


Are you asking why they don't try to lift a payload into orbit using a 2-lb battery powered hexacopter?
2013-07-06 08:47:05 AM
1 votes:
Holy f*ckballs Batman, that's incredible
2013-07-06 08:46:21 AM
1 votes:
Why didn't they just do what they needed to do with the hexacopter in the first place?
 
Displayed 28 of 28 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report